The CLIMAR Network, one of many within Higher Education, was funded by the UKRI to bring together and support a community of individuals interested in the relationship between antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and Climate Change.
It is a network that is trying to write a story.
AMR and Climate Change both suffer from misunderstanding; AMR’s centres in part around a lack of public understanding of the issue, and the fact that antimicrobial resistance, and its threat, is multifaceted, with many dots still to join, and yet more still to discover. And while there is public awareness of Climate Change, it is so entrenched with the progression of the Anthropocene that solutions, at times, appear beyond us.
Both, ultimately, are vast, systemic, ‘wicked’ problems. We wanted the network’s makeup to recognise this; CLIMAR would not only help connect people across the world working on AMR and climate change, but would be open to bringing in new individuals, who could contribute vital knowledge, join some dots, discover others, and help introduce a common language to bridge gaps in understanding. It would be transdisciplinary in its reach, would influence policy as well as raise public awareness. It would make a unique contribution.
But where to begin? We asked Skating Panda to help; they agreed, and in so doing, the creative social impact consultancy became one of the first “co-writers” of our story.
Skating Panda works across systemic problems in health, gender and climate to address the UN Sustainable Development Goals. They offered to produce a Theory of Change framework, to provide clarity on CLIMAR’s unique impact. They would also work on the network’s “buy-in” with its members, to ensure it was providing what people needed, so that they too could co-write CLIMAR’s story. There would be a full measurement framework to prove and improve impact, and this framework could lay the foundation for compelling comms messaging, something that the network needs.
Scene setting: CLIMAR’s Theory of Change
Skating Panda began by interviewing CLIMAR advisory board members, network members, and relevant experts to generate insights for a shared vision of impact. These insights can be distilled into:
Magnitude of the Problem: Interviewees emphasised that AMR is a far greater threat than widely recognised. There is consensus that, due to communication gaps and scientific and technical gaps, the breadth and complexity can overwhelm stakeholders leading to inaction and fear of committing AMR to agendas. However, interviewees stress the importance of accepting this complexity to begin movement.
Understanding the Problem: Interviewees recognised a divisiveness between the two frameworks of One Health and Planetary Health. Each are championed by different communities, some of which have conflicting interests. To move forward in AMR, it was emphasised that we should be looking at the big picture – i.e., what are the frameworks trying to do.
Main Challenges
Comms Challenges: How do we even talk about it? When asked how interviewees would explain AMR or Planetary Health to a child, most interviewees struggled – it felt too big to simplify. Without accessible language, public engagement meaningful action would be difficult. It’s important for the network to consider its role in bridging this gap.
Difference of Opinion: When accessible language isn’t used, a psychological resistance forms and you begin to lose people. Interviewees noted how the importance and urgency of AMR is not understood from major players, including policy makers, investors, the private sector, as well as other researchers. This lack of understanding causes stagnation in movement or cyclical prioritisation as stakeholders prefer to wait for ‘more evidence’ rather than taking proactive, preventative action.
The structural challenges of siloed working is aided by resistant thinking. According to interviewees, this can manifest as AMR being labelled as a problem for someone else, creating departmental siloes where individuals don’t see AMR falling within their remit or expertise.
There is also Funding & Investment to consider. Interviewees shared that AMR has historically been viewed as a low-priority issue by stakeholders, often seen as non-urgent and underfunded. Currently, spending environments are still constrained, and resource allocation is dictated by organisational priorities which may not directly align with AMR, even though there may be intersection.
This feedback can sculpt CLIMAR’s intended impact and sharpen its narrative. Good comms would give CLIMAR the opportunity to develop a framework that could look towards resolving complexity, and offer a shared language around the issues. Recognising the intersections, and providing leadership and guidance, would mean the network could navigate differences of opinion. If CLIMAR could showcase transdisciplinary connections, and show how remits overlapped, it could go towards addressing siloed working. And with Working Groups at its core, the network could focus on co-creating knowledge and evidence to make recommendations and drive action, and identify and address knowledge gaps.
Together with Skating Panda, the CLIMAR leads developed some intended outcomes for the network.
These are outcomes requiring the network to provide something to mobilise its members: to connect, improve understanding, and give the community the lift it needs to act. And the intended impact?
Galvanising network members through knowledge exchange, leading to co-creation of transdisciplinary solutions and actions.
As the network moves out of its nascent phase into active Working Groups, organising events and curating relevant news, CLIMAR will reach out to its members to check how it is faring, and in so doing, these members will be galvanised to help shape – or co-write – CLIMAR’s story.